cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Hub 3 / Compal CH7465-LG (TG2492LG) and CGNV4 Latency Cause

Datalink
Up to speed

Good Day Ladies and Gentlemen,

Greetings from the other side of the pond, so to speak.  Over the last few weeks I've been perusing various user forums across North America and Europe for issues related to Intel Puma 6 modem latency.  Of those forums, your Hub 3 stands out as yet another Puma 6 based modem where users see continuous latency no matter what site is used or what online game is played. Considering all of the problems that are on the go, the following information should be of interest to all Hub 3, Compal CH7465-LG and Hitron CGNV4 modem users.  There is much more to post regarding this, so this is a start, to alert VM users as to the real cause of the latency and hopefully engage the VM engineering staff, via the forum staff, with Arris.  I am surprised to see that there has been no mention on this board of users from other ISPs who are suffering the exact same issues with their modems, so, this may come as a surprise to some, and possibly old news to others.

So, the short story ........

The Hub 3 / Compal CH7465-LG (TG2492LG) & Hiton CGNV4 modems are Intel Puma 6 / 6 Media Gateway (MG) based modems.  These modems exhibit high latency to the modem and high latency thru the modem.  The latency affects all IPV4 and IPV6 protocols, so it will be seen on every internet application and game.  The basic cause is the processing of the data packets thru a CPU software based process instead of thru the hardware processor / accelerator.  It appears that a higher priority task runs periodically, causing the packet processing to halt, and then resume.  This is observed as latency in applications and in ping tests to the modem and beyond.  For the last several weeks, Hitron, along with Intel and Rogers Communications in Canada have been addressing the latency issue within the Hitron CGNxxx series modems.  To date, only the IPV4 ICMP latency has been resolved.  Although this is only one protocol, it does show that a Puma 6MG modem is capable of using the hardware processor / accelerator with good results.  Currently Rogers is waiting for further firmware updates from Hitron which should include an expanded list of resolved protocol latency issues.  For Arris modems, "Netdog" an Arris engineer indicated last week that Arris was onboard to address the issue for the Arris SB6190 modem.  That should be considered as good news for any Arris modem (read Hub 3) user as Arris should be able to port those changes over to other Puma 6/6MG modems fairly quickly.  This is not a trivial exercise and will probably take several weeks to accomplish.  Note that there is no guarantee at this point that it is possible to shift all packet processing to the hardware processor / accelerator without suffering from any packet loss side effects.  Time will tell if all of the technical issues can be resolved with the current hardware included in the Puma 6/6MG chipset.  Last night, Netdog loaded beta firmware on selected test modems on the Comcast Communications network.  As this was only done last night, it's too soon to tell what this version resolves and if it was successful or not.  Netdog has contacts with staff at Comcast, Rogers, Charter and Cox Communications to fan out beta versions and modifications for testing.  I'd say its time to add Virgin Media and/or Liberty Global to that group as well.

Recent activity:

Approx three weeks ago a DSLReports user, xymox1 started a thread where he reported high latency to an Arris SB6190 and illustrated that with numerous MultiPing plots.  This is the same latency that I and other users with Rogers communications have been dealing with for months so it came as no surprise.  As well as reporting via that thread, xymox1 took it upon himself to email several staff members at Arris, Intel, Cablelabs and others.  The result of that campaign was Netdog's announcement, last week, that Arris was fully engaged at resolving the issue.  That has led to last nights release of beta firmware, although as I indicated its too early to determine what the beta firmware resolves, if anything.


The original thread that xymox1 started is here:

https://www.dslreports.com/forum/r31079834-ALL-SB6190-is-a-terrible-modem-Intel-Puma-6-MaxLinear-mis...


Yesterday, DSLReports issued a news story covering the thread:

https://www.dslreports.com/shownews/The-Arris-SB6190-Modem-Puma-6-Chipset-Have-Some-Major-Issues-138...


Today, Arris responded:

https://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Arris-Tells-us-Its-Working-With-Intel-on-SB6190-Puma6-Problems-1...


That response was also picked by Multichannel.com

http://www.multichannel.com/news/distribution/intel-arris-working-firmware-fix-sb6190-modem/409379

This is more news likely to appear in the next few days as additional tech and news staff pick up on this issue.


Hub 3 observations:

Like many others using a Puma 6/6MG modem, Hub 3 users are experiencing latency when they ping the modem, or ping a target outside of the home, game online or use low latency applications.  The common misconception is that this is Buffer Bloat. It's not. Its most likely a case of the packet processing stopping while the CPU processes a higher priority task.  The packet processing is done via the CPU no matter what mode the modem is operating in, modem mode or router mode and no matter what IPV4 or IPV6 protocol is used.  Normally, the latency is just that, latency.  The exception are UDP packets. In this case there is latency and packet loss.  The result of that is delayed and failed DNS lookups, and poor game performance for games that use UDP for player/server comms or player/player comms.


Can this be fixed?

So far, it appears that the answer is yes.  Rogers Communications issued beta firmware to a small group of test modems in October.  This version shifted the IPV4 ICMP processing from the CPU to the hardware processor / accelerator, resulting in greatly improved performance in ping latency.  At the present time we are waiting for the next version firmware which should shift other protocols over to the hardware processor / accelerator.  That can be seen in the following post:

http://communityforums.rogers.com/t5/forums/forumtopicpage/board-id/Getting_connected/message-id/369...

The details and results of last nights beta release to the Comcast group have yet to be seen.

At this point there is enough reading to keep most staff and users busy.  My intention is to post some of the history leading up to this point and instructions on how to detect the latency and packet loss.  This is not thru the use of a BQM.  I had hoped to post this all at once but events are moving much faster than I had thought they would.  For now this should suffice to get the ball rolling.

Below is a link to a post with a couple of HrPing plots from my 32 channel modem to the connected CMTS.  This shows the latency that is observed and reflects what others have posted in this forum using Pingplotter and HrPing.

https://www.dslreports.com/forum/r31106550-

HrPing is one of the freebie applications that can be used to monitor the latency to and thru the modem. 

Pingplots with Pingplotter which show the latency from my modem to the CMTS can be found in the first two to three rows of my online image library at Rogers Communications, located below.  They are essentially what the BQM would look like if you were able to zoom into the plot to the point where you could see the individual ping spikes.  Those ping spikes are common to Puma 6 and Puma 6MG modems.

http://communityforums.rogers.com/t5/media/gallerypage/user-id/829158

 

 

 [MOD EDIT: Subject heading changed to assist community]

4,478 REPLIES 4,478


@Adduxi wrote:

@chriswheeler wrote:

Virgin Media has a duty to make sure what ever they are rolling out to customers works, they have not done that and have just rolled out a faulty product without any testing.


Incorrect.  All hubs are subject to testing, both internally and by a selection of users on this Forum. 

How VM deal with bug reports is up to them, but they are tested, I can assure you.


While your answer is technically correct, it's not contextually correct - they test them according to their basic minimum internal certification requirements, not according to any and all potential real world scenarios, such as Gamers experiencing lag and/or VoIP latency. To be fair the entire modem/router industry did not even contemplate testing latency to this degree until this issue became so apparent in the puma series chipsets. This is now, of course, much more noticeable due to the up-shift in speeds & bonded channels used on the Virgin media network for fast tier cable subscriptions.

What is not in dispute is that VM were acutely aware that feedback from the SH3 trial users did indicate there were latency issues. They chose to ignore that observation/fact and press ahead with full SH3 public release. They also have chosen to this day to not disclose/advise anything official in their marketing/advertising that there is a latency problem with their entire line of SH3 modems. At the same time they are pushing everyone to upgrade to this dodgy chipset.

Add in the mix that they, until recently, offered a dedicated gamer package is just salt into the would for latency sensitive users. Arguably supplying the SH3 with known latency issues could definitely be construed as 'false advertising' or misrepresentation for this use case.

I can see already tempers are very high amongst users who are affected as the responsiveness of VM leaves a lot to be desired.

At the end of the day a fix needs to come out sooner rather than later and/or a modem replacement asap. Keeping us in the dark and not fixing the issue for such a long time has been a complete disservice to the customer base and the now unhappy customers are likely to bail on VM when any other service providers step in to fill the gap.


your turn VM.

nikos1985
Tuning in

Ah now this explains a lot. I was searching the forums to see why my internet was suddenly having terrible latency after an engineer had come to repair a fault and come across this and see many people with same issue. I'm getting terrible latency when having a couple games of fifa or even using viber, I see the superhub 3 may be the cause. just wanted to add a post just to show that more and more people will be affected while they are handing out superhub 3.

To think I had the superhub 1 before the engineer came round. Had I known the problems I would have asked him not to swap. I hope for a fix soon, although seeing as this has been an issue for 2 years? I wont hold my breath.


@Adduxi wrote:

@chriswheeler wrote:

Virgin Media has a duty to make sure what ever they are rolling out to customers works, they have not done that and have just rolled out a faulty product without any testing.


Incorrect.  All hubs are subject to testing, both internally and by a selection of users on this Forum. 

How VM deal with bug reports is up to them, but they are tested, I can assure you.


I can assure you that when I was a trialist for the SH3 the latency issues were highlighted, along with others.  We were all amazed when then started shipping buggy SH3's to new customers, even more so when they started Marketing a "Gamer" package.

What is the point of testing if you ignore the feedback - terrible customer relations.

 

Finding out on YouTube. Apparently Virgin Media Knew about the issues since 2015..
When the idea of the Superhub 3.0 was a Fart in the wind.

I am really disappointed in VM, especially that the gave us information on this hub3.0 being better than there previous ones.

"Gamer Package" is a con, as I am a gamer and some or most of us in this thread are "Gamers" we know lowest ping and Jitter and Packet Loss is a Big Unstable thing! Not so much speed matters.

But "Virgin Media" should learn from the mistakes of Keeping Trials of such things not secret as a whole we all could make a difference, the Superhub 3.0 should never had been released and they should not have stopped offering the SH2AC.

As to the information from Trialists back when it was top secret.. NDA and such..
There was a issue with it that should have been addressed and seen to accordingly and Virgin Media "Failed" to address, now we have a 256 Page thread that has more than "2000" posts and it is a joke!

We all pay for a "broadband service" some of us pay for a "Broadband Vivid Gamer Service", the Definition of Gamer where it comes from for yhe online space which you are attracting with you Advertising is to Gamers that are Playing Online Games that require Packet Loss to be Zero, Zero Jitter, the lowest Ping you can get and a Stable Connection.

Which we are not Receiving at all.
I want to congratulate Virgin Media for Failing in there Duty in fixing this ongoing issue, ever since 2015!

(Do not do Closed Trials)
(Offer us a way to opt-in Via the Modem)
So we instantly gain access to Beta Firmware like you can do via Steam, you instantly go into the trial..)

*some Routers well most routers let you click a box and to install a Beta Firmware.
?why do we have to be picked out of a hat to get and use the firmwares and to go months and even years to get something to fix your messups!?

To note:

I would really like to push for a partial refund for the "gamers package" since everyone that went on it from.

The whole Contract of the "Gamer Package" still uses "Gamer" inside.
Since it refers as Gamer it is in the context of Broadband, so not refering to Offline Games, we expect "Gamer Grade Service", like you do with ASUS ROG products.
We have our rights.

As it is a disappointment and no Quality of Service as we all deserved!.

I am one annoyed and angry with VM for Scamming us all!

£109 PM I pay VM for all my Services and they are Planning on another Price Hike soon!

The only conclusion I can reach about VM's silence and obstinate unwillingness to fix this issue after all this time:

They don't give a **bleep** about it because they don't truly care about their customers once they're in a contract.

Everyone should make future broadband purchasing decisions with this in mind. It's absolutely outrageous the only option we have is to spend hours on the phone hoping and trying to speak to some guy called Tristan who is the only person in this MASSIVE company who is willing to help! Completely lost all faith in this company, it's almost comical at this point.

 

[MOD EDIT: Inappropriate language removed, please review the Forum Guidelines]

How many people here had to pay for there Superhub 3.0?

I was charged £14.99 twice.
Even tho it stated it as being a "FREE UPGRADE".

A fix isn’t coming. It’s been over a year since this problem really took off and not a single improvement has been made.

Virgin don’t care, all they care about is profit and how to achieve that profit in the cheapest way. The next Hub 4 will be selected on how cheap they can get it, if the Hub4 still has a Puma 6 chipset in it and as a result of the problems they can get it at rock bottom price, then that will be the one they go for. The management will only be thinking of their own bonus for cost cutting. If it all works badly for Virgin a new management team will be picked and the current ones paid off handsomely.

Virgin like most other businesses to not give a flying monkeys about its customers, all they want is your money.

I can get BT fibre but the speeds are low compared to what I get with Virgin, I did have a Hub 3 send in the post and I installed it myself, my insistence of telling VM I didn’t need to pay for an engineers to put in a power plug and screw the cable from one router into another one resulted in me keeping hold of my Hub 2, if an engineer had come he most certainly would have taken my Hub 2 with him. By the end of my first week with the Hub 3 I had my Hub 2 reconnected and put into modem and and my Asus plugged in. I’m tempted by BT much better latency but with my current set up of a Hub 2 and Asus router, I don’t suffer the problems the Hub 3 owners have. I still have the Hub 3 in a box rotting away in the garage.


@donniem wrote:

They don't give a **bleep** about it because they don't truly care about their customers once they're in a contract.

 

Of course they don't care about the handful of customers who actually experience these issues, it isn't worth it to them. VM would rather foist these few awkward customers off onto another ISP. This isn't a significant issue, if it were you'd see new threads about it all the time rather than just a few moaners on the same old thread repeating the same thing over and over again. What is actually stunning is that there is a partial fix in the works being beta tested. I find it amazing that VM even bothered.

@Badvok

"moaners"? wow.

Hey, let me ask you something. If VM suddenly stopped working properly because of a hardware issue and you couldn't stream online video like Youtube/Netflix or browse the net properly how would you feel? I bet you'd having a rant and a whinge huh.

Now how would you feel KNOWING the problem is 100% VM's fault but they keep fobbing you off telling you everything is fine? You would probably have your frilly little knickers all in a twist huh?

The people here have a genuine issue that has been well documented by many more people across other forums internationally so keep your toxic opinion to yourself, move along and get on with your day 🙂